Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[Capra76]

8 minutes ago, Mr_Tayto said:

I care about my own conq, which is deathly effing boring to play. Just a pointless, boring ship.

 

Seems to be the way WG is taking the game, balancing through boredom.

[Panocek]

15 minutes ago, Capra76 said:

 

Seems to be the way WG is taking the game, balancing through boredom.

Which always was the case. If something is too good, instead nerfing what makes *vehicle* too good, WG changes everything except OP part, resulting in still overpowered but unfun toy to play with. Best example - World of Tanks and Foch 155 tank destroyer. WG invention of *what if Frenchies would upgun their existing Foch* and they gave it 155mm gun (very large by tonk standards) and autoloader to it, so it can dump 3 rounds in quick succession then run for lengthy reload. Apparently ability to one-clip tier 10 tanks was deemed overpowered, so WG obliterated tank handling, aim time, dispersion BUT left offending 3shot 155mm, so when stars align and RNGesus says "da", you still can 3shot tier 10 tank

[NothingButTheRain]

On 3/27/2019 at 3:44 PM, Uglesett said:

Why, though?

 

I mean, if they supply further specific reasons (beyond the ones brought up previously) for why they find them frustrating and annoying, you're still going to consider those reasons to be subjective. And if you want "objective" arguments, then there's pretty much nothing to discuss about the game, ever.

 

For example, take this:

It's a perfectly valid set of (yes, subjective) reasons for considering the RN BBs not OP, but irritating.

 

Because when you get down to it, this is an entertainment product. And the entertainment value is always going to be grounded in subjective opinions.

Why what? What is your question here?

 

It's perfectly valid? It basically gives a list of advantages the Conqueror has but otoh you mention Conqueror is not OP.

The advantages you summed up are advantages that make Conqueror stronger, but this list fails to give the disadvantages of the Conqueror and can therefor be considered biased.

 

If you go with a Wooster vs a Henri, who will win?

If you go with a DM vs a Stalingrad who will win?

Do I see people whine about any tier 10 cruisers except Stalingrad and that ship is OP and has a couple other things going against it. But in other 1 on 1 skirmishes of same shiptype and same tier, it's kinda common for one to beat the other and part of this is because their role is different. And to some this will be annoying.

 

And another thing is something that makes this more a REEEEEEEEE then a valid critisism. The Conqueror has no citadel, but your source doesn't claim that Conqueror has the weakest armor of all its brethren and will eat pen damage the most. It has very poor torp protection where a Yamato may hardly feel the torps (and torps do a lot of damage that can't be healed back) and I could keep up lengthening the list of what makes Conqueror itself frustrating to play in conparison to the other tier 10 ships and why the other ships are more powerful.

 

So frankly, I don't consider this source of yours valid enough to warrant it being irritating. And personally I also don't see a Conq as irritating when I play my other battleships. If I want to disengage my non-Conq from a engagement from an enemy Conq, I can stealth up almost as well as Conq can when not taking land cover into consideration. It's really not that big of a deal to me.

 

So frankly, I think these people are just not gitting gut enough, right?

 

I totally agree with your last bit. I do not wish to make this a really big deal or something anyway, but then I also don't need to read these whines of people when some of these people whine with everything they disagree with because they know WG is going to listen to them eventually.

[NothingButTheRain]

On 3/27/2019 at 8:18 PM, Mr_Tayto said:

Meh, I don't care about conqs in the enemy team either.

 

I care about my own conq, which is deathly effing boring to play. Just a pointless, boring ship.

Well, so stop playing it if you don't like it? Others like it and be glad for that.

 

If you find doing the dishes utterly boring but your roommate loves it, best is to be thankful and not help change your roommate's mind so ssssst 

[Uglesett]

5 minutes ago, NothingButTheRain said:

Why what? What is your question here?

Errr... what makes you think I'm asking a question?

 

Quote

It's perfectly valid? It basically gives a list of advantages the Conqueror has but otoh you mention Conqueror is not OP.

The advantages you summed up are advantages that make Conqueror stronger, but this list fails to give the disadvantages of the Conqueror and can therefor be considered biased.

 

Dude, stop with the strawmen.

 

I'm not claiming Conqueror is OP. Neither is @Toivia. A ship can be "balanced" but still be irritating.

 

It's not a list of what makes the Conq OP, it's a list of things that makes it irritating. There's a difference.

[NothingButTheRain]

17 minutes ago, Uglesett said:

Errr... what makes you think I'm asking a question?

 

Well, for one, this here

On 3/27/2019 at 3:44 PM, Uglesett said:

Why, though?

sure looks like a question to me 

 

Quote

 

Dude, stop with the strawmen.

 

I'm not claiming Conqueror is OP. Neither is @Toivia. A ship can be "balanced" but still be irritating.

 

It's not a list of what makes the Conq OP, it's a list of things that makes it irritating. There's a difference.

Strawman? You think I'm pulling your leg when I say that I find the Conqueror totally not frustrating to play against? Becasue I'm not.

 

If that is a list of what makes Conq irritating, you should just REEEEE less, sorry dude.

 

Do you think the conceilment really makes that much of a difference at 15km or so? Because it doesn't. Same for it having a hard to reacg citadel, most tier 10 battleships are actually very hard to citadel with the most notable exception being the Yamato.

[NothingButTheRain]

On 3/27/2019 at 5:32 PM, Toivia said:

Well, @NothingButTheRain, you're confusing arguments and statements. I supplied an argument and explained it with examples. If you don't want to read that, your choice, just don't say I didn't state any reason for why RN BBs are frustrating to play against when I actually did.

 

("x is/isn't frustrating to play against" is merely a statement of your opinion on a subject)

 

Btw, the testing of raised citadels on Conqueror and (somewhat surprisingly Monarch) would indicate WG is aware of issues with RN BBs and is allocating ressources to try and fix them. Which for once - and on a whole* -  I welcome.

 

*It would obviously be ridiculous if Monarch got a raised citadel making it subsceptible to get punished yet Lion stayed as is.

They are probably trying to cater to the people who voice that WG is not listening to them, as WG has actually stated that, to them, Conqueror and the rest of the HE battleships are fine. It's a waste of resources if you ask me.

[Darth_Glorious]

Yoshino has terrible Torp launching angle, you need to give ~full broadside  (71 degree) to launch all 8 torps from that side.

[Tyrendian89]

23 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Yoshino has terrible Torp launching angle, you need to give ~full broadside  (71 degree) to launch all 8 torps from that side.

I wouldn't call that terrible, certainly not in the context of other IJN cruisers. That looks to be pretty much Atago style, which isnt all that bad (although I will admit Atago is a much smaller ship)

[Darth_Glorious]

Kleber doesn't have long range AA (no DP guns), however its main gun range can reach 19 km with mod.

[DFens_666]

1 minute ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Kleber [...] however its main gun range can reach 19 km with mod. 

 

 

 

[Tyrendian89]

5 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Kleber doesn't have long range AA (no DP guns), however its main gun range can reach 19 km with mod.

[Darth_Glorious]

Shell traversing time of Kleber :

19 km 14s

15 km 9.9s

10km 5.8s

5 km 2.51s

[invicta2012]

9 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Kleber doesn't have long range AA (no DP guns), however its main gun range can reach 19 km with mod.

What's the Rate of Fire on that again?

[Darth_Glorious]

1 minute ago, invicta2012 said:

What's the Rate of Fire on that again?

8.57 rpm per gun

[Darth_Glorious]

Bayard bow is 13 mm but deck and midship armour are covered by 27 mm armour

[avenger121]

1 hour ago, Tyrendian89 said:

I wouldn't call that terrible, certainly not in the context of other IJN cruisers. That looks to be pretty much Atago style, which isnt all that bad (although I will admit Atago is a much smaller ship)

 

I am afraid you missread that graphic, the outer cones display the torpedo angles, which are pretty much like Zaos torp angles. Atagos torp angles are amazing compared to that.

[Tyrendian89]

2 minutes ago, avenger121 said:

 

I am afraid you missread that graphic, the outer cones display the torpedo angles, which are pretty much like Zaos torp angles. Atagos torp angles are amazing compared to that.

and I think you are misreading it - because I think (and it's always worked like that to my knowledge) the much wider inner cone shows where you can bring a single launcher to bear, the narrow outer cone shows where you can bring both to bear.

 

We'll see who of us is correct - might be you, might be me

[Darth_Glorious]

More details about Yushino torp angle :

[avenger121]

I stand corrected. That is indeed far closer to Atago than Zao, but how do you get that 71 degree angle then @Darth_Glorious?

[Darth_Glorious]

1 minute ago, avenger121 said:

I stand corrected. That is indeed far closer to Atago than Zao, but how do you get that 71 degree angle then @Darth_Glorious?

You have to angle 70 degrees to shoot all torps

[avenger121]

6 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

You have to angle 70 degrees to shoot all torps

 

Ah you meant the angle which allows you to use both torp launchers.

 

 

Anyway, I think far more interesting will be how squishy the Yoshino will end up, because it is the definition of anti-fun being citadeld all the time despite being angled.

[HaachamaShipping]

2 hours ago, Tyrendian89 said:

I wouldn't call that terrible, certainly not in the context of other IJN cruisers. That looks to be pretty much Atago style, which isnt all that bad (although I will admit Atago is a much smaller ship)

Yeah, compared to the other T10 cruiser Zao, this looks pretty generous.

1 hour ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Bayard bow is 13 mm but deck and midship armour are covered by 27 mm armour

What's this, the ultimate troll armour? at the same time can bounce unlucky Bismarcks and get overmatched by lucky Hippers?

[DFens_666]

29 minutes ago, Seiranko said:

What's this, the ultimate troll armour? at the same time can bounce unlucky Bismarcks and get overmatched by lucky Hippers?

 

Boyard meets Zao (probably works with Atago too):

 

 

IJN accuracy will help to find the sweetspot, if not, use HE

Profit

[Toivia]

4 hours ago, Darth_Glorious said:

Bayard bow is 13 mm but deck and midship armour are covered by 27 mm armour

I hate that. Doesn't even Edinburgh have 16mm plating (same as Neptune, Minotaur)? Why would a French light cruiser be worse?

 

As for the midship being better protected, that would make sense, plenty cruisers are tankier there (typically japanese and german ones). Just can't rap my head around the extremely squishy bow yet average to above average midship.